To install click the Add extension button. That's it.

The source code for the WIKI 2 extension is being checked by specialists of the Mozilla Foundation, Google, and Apple. You could also do it yourself at any point in time.

How to transfigure the Wikipedia

Would you like Wikipedia to always look as professional and up-to-date? We have created a browser extension. It will enhance any encyclopedic page you visit with the magic of the WIKI 2 technology.

Try it — you can delete it anytime.

Install in 5 seconds
4,5
Kelly Slayton
Congratulations on this excellent venture… what a great idea!
Alexander Grigorievskiy
I use WIKI 2 every day and almost forgot how the original Wikipedia looks like.
Live Statistics
English Articles
Improved in 24 Hours
Added in 24 Hours
What we do. Every page goes through several hundred of perfecting techniques; in live mode. Quite the same Wikipedia. Just better.
Great Wikipedia has got greater.
.
Leo
Newton
Brights
Milds

Religious interpretations of the Big Bang theory

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series on
Physical cosmology
Early universe
Backgrounds
Expansion · Future
Components · Structure
Components
Structure
Experiments
Scientists
Subject history

Since the emergence of the Big Bang theory as the dominant physical cosmological paradigm, there have been a variety of reactions by religious groups regarding its implications for religious cosmologies. Some accept the scientific evidence at face value, some seek to harmonize the Big Bang with their religious tenets, and some reject or ignore the evidence for the Big Bang theory.[1]

YouTube Encyclopedic

  • 1/5
    Views:
    3 390 312
    911 142
    1 781
    3 671 296
    767 289
  • Science, Religion, and the Big Bang
  • This Video DISMANTLES The Big Bang Theory
  • If Science And The Bible Disagree Then Explain The Big Bang Theory!
  • Believe in God in 5 Minutes (Scientific Proof)
  • How Science Could Prove the Existence of God | Michio Kaku | Google Zeitgeist

Transcription

Physicists used to think that the universe had existed forever, unchangingly, because that's what their observations of the night sky suggested. Needless to say, this view clashed with the "origin" or "creation" stories of most major religions, which hold that the universe had a beginning. So it's not surprising that it was a Catholic priest, Georges Lemaître, who was one of the first major proponents of a new scientific viewpoint - that the universe DID have a beginning. Lemaître, of course, was also an excellent mathematician and scientist and based this conviction not (just) on his religious beliefs but upon new experimental evidence from Edwin Hubble that showed the universe was expanding. This evidence, combined with the mathematics of general relativity allowed Lemaître to "rewind" cosmic history and calculate that the farther back in time you go, the smaller the universe had to be. The natural conclusion is that everything we can currently see in the universe was at one point in time more or less at one point in space. Lemaître called this idea the "primeval atom", but of course today we know it as "the big bang theory". Except "big bang" is a horrible name - it would be much more accurate to call it "the everywhere stretch". Because one of the most common misconceptions about the big bang is that it implies that the entire universe was compressed into a single point from which it then somehow expanded into the surrounding... nothingness? It is true that the observable universe, that is, the part of the whole universe we can see from earth, WAS indeed shrunk down to a very very small bit of space, but that bit of space was NOT a single point, nor was the rest of the Universe also in that same bit of space. The explanation for this is the magical power of infinity. The whole universe is really big - current data show it's at least 20 times bigger than the observable universe, but that's just a lower bound - it might be infinite. And if you have an infinite amount of space, you can scale space down, shrink everything to minuscule proportions, and still have an infinite amount of space. Kind of like how you can zoom out as much as you want from a number line, but it'll still be an infinite number line. Essentially, space doesn't need anywhere to expand "into" because it can expand into itself and still have plenty of room. In fact, this is possible even if space turns out not to be infinite in size, though the reasons are complicated and have to do with the infinite differentiability of the metric of spacetime... But anyway, the event unfortunately known as the big bang was basically a time, long ago, when space was much more squeezed together, and the observable universe, that is, everything that we see from earth, was crammed into a very very small piece of space. Because the ENTIRE early universe was dense and hot everywhere, spacetime was curved everywhere and this curvature manifested itself as a rapid expansion of space throughout the universe. And although people call this "the big bang", it wasn't just big, it was everywhere. And it wasn't really an explosion - it was space stretching out. It's really quite unfortunate that "the Everywhere Stretch" isn't nearly as catchy as "the Big Bang". Which brings us to the "big bang singularity", which is an even horribler name because every single word is misleading. I mean, "singularity" seems to imply something that happened at a single point. Which isn't at all what it's referring to - it SHOULD be called "the part of the Everywhere Stretch where we don't know what we're talking about." Basically, our current physical models for the universe are unable to properly explain and predict what was happening at the very very beginning when the universe was super SUPER scaled down. But rather than call it the "time when we don't have a clue what was happening, ANYWHERE", for some reason we call it a "singularity". This ignorance, however, does conveniently answer the question What happened BEFORE the big bang? Because it tells us the question isn't well defined - back when space was so incredibly compressed and everything was ridiculously hot and dense, our mathematical models of the universe break down SO MUCH that "time" doesn't even make sense. It's kind of like how at the north pole, the concept of "north" breaks down - I mean, what's north of the north pole? The only thing you can say is that everywhere on earth is south of the north pole, or similarly everywhen in the universe is after... the beginning. But once time began, whenever that was, space expanded incredibly quickly all throughout the universe - for a little while. Then expansion slowed, the universe cooled, stuff happened, and after a few billion years, here we are. One thing we still DON'T know is why this Everywhere Stretching happened - that is, why did the universe start off in such a funny, compressed state, and why did it follow the seemingly arbitrary laws of physics that have governed its expansion and development ever since? For Georges Lemaître, this might be where God finally comes into the picture to explain the things science can't. Except that experimental evidence doesn't actually rule out the possibility that there may indeed be a time "before" the beginning, a previous age of the universe that ended when space collapsed in on itself, getting quite compressed and dense and hot, but not enough to mangle up our ideas of what time is. It would have then bounced back out, stretching in a fashion similar to what we call the big bang, but without the "we don't know what we're talking about" singularity part. So, physics may actually be nudging us back to the view that the Universe is eternal and didn't begin after all. In which case Professor Lemaître might have to rethink his interpretation of the words "in the beginning."

Background

The Big Bang itself is a scientific theory, and as such, stands or falls by its agreement with observations.[2] However, as a theory which addresses the nature of the universe since its earliest discernible existence, the Big Bang carries possible theological implications regarding the concept of creation out of nothing.[3][4][5] Many atheist philosophers have argued against the idea of the Universe having a beginning – the universe might simply have existed for all eternity, but with the emerging evidence of the Big Bang theory, both theists and physicists have viewed it as capable of being explained by theism;[6][7] a popular philosophical argument for the existence of God known as the Kalam cosmological argument rests in the concepts of the Big Bang.[8][9] In the 1920s and 1930s, almost every major cosmologist preferred an eternal steady state universe, and several complained that the beginning of time implied by the Big Bang imported religious concepts into physics; this objection was later repeated by supporters of the steady-state theory,[10] who rejected the implication that the universe had a beginning.[11][12]

Hinduism

The view from the Hindu Puranas is that of an eternal universe cosmology in which time has no absolute beginning, but rather is infinite and cyclic, as opposed to a universe which originated from a Big Bang.[13][14] However, the Encyclopædia of Hinduism, referencing Katha Upanishad 2:20, states that the Big Bang theory reminds humanity that everything came from the Brahman which is "subtler than the atom, greater than the greatest."[15] It consists of several "Big Bangs" and "Big Crunches" following each other in a cyclical manner.[16][17][18]

The Nasadiya Sukta, the Hymn of Creation in the Rigveda (10:129), mentions the world beginning from nothing through the power of heat.[19][20] This can be seen as corresponding to the Big Bang theory.

THEN was not non-existent nor existent: there was no realm of air, no sky beyond it. What covered in, and where? and what gave shelter? Was water there, unfathomed depth of water?

— Rig Veda X.129.1

Death was not then, nor was there aught immortal: no sign was there, the day's and night's divider. That One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature: apart from it was nothing whatsoever

— Rig Veda X.129.2

Several prominent modern scientists have remarked that Hinduism (and also Buddhism and Jainism by extension as all three faiths share most of these philosophies) is the only religion (or civilization) in all of recorded history, that has timescales and theories in astronomy (cosmology), that appear to correspond to those of modern scientific cosmology, e.g. Carl Sagan,[21] Niels Bohr, Erwin Schrödinger, Werner Heisenberg,[22][23][24] Robert Oppenheimer,[25] George Sudarshan,[26] Fritjof Capra[27] etc. Sir Roger Penrose is among the present-day physicists that believe in a cyclical model for the Universe, wherein there are alternating cycles consisting of Big Bangs and Big Crunches, and he describes this model to be "a bit more like Hindu philosophy" as compared to the Abrahamic faiths.[28]

Christianity

Further information: Christianity and science

The Big Bang theory was partly developed by a Catholic priest, Georges Lemaître, who believed that there was neither a connection nor a conflict between his religion and his science.[29] At the November 22, 1951, opening meeting of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, Pope Pius XII declared that the Big Bang theory does not conflict with the Catholic concept of creation.[30][31] Some Conservative Protestant Christian denominations have also welcomed the Big Bang theory as supporting a historical interpretation of the doctrine of creation;[32] however, adherents of Young Earth creationism, who advocate a very literal interpretation of the Book of Genesis, tend to reject the theory.

Baháʼí Faith

Further information: Baháʼí Faith and science

Bahá’u’lláh, the founder of the Baháʼí Faith, has taught that the universe has "neither beginning nor ending".[33] In the Tablet of Wisdom ("Lawh-i-Hikmat", written 1873–1874). Bahá'u'lláh states: "That which hath been in existence had existed before, but not in the form thou seest today. The world of existence came into being through the heat generated from the interaction between the active force and that which is its recipient. These two are the same, yet they are different." The terminology used here refers to ancient Greek and Islamic philosophy (al-Kindi, Avicenna, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi and Shaykh Ahmad).[34][35] In an early text, Bahá’u’lláh describes the successive creation of the four natures heat and cold (the active force), dryness and moisture (the recipients), and the four elements fire, air, water and earth.[34] About the phrase "That which hath been in existence had existed before, but not in the form thou seest today," 'Abdu'l-Bahá has stated that it means that the universe is evolving.[34] He also states that "the substance and primary matter of contingent beings is the ethereal power, which is invisible and only known through its effects... Ethereal matter is itself both the active force and the recipient... it is the sign of the Primal Will in the phenomenal world... The ethereal matter is, therefore, the cause, since light, heat, and electricity appear from it. It is also the effect, for as vibrations take place in it, they become visible...".[34]

Jean-Marc Lepain, Robin Mihrshahi, Dale E. Lehman and Julio Savi suggest a possible relation of this statement with the Big Bang theory.[36][37][38][39]

Islam

Further information: Islamic attitudes towards science

Writing for the Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies, Haslin Hasan and Ab. Hafiz Mat Tuah wrote that modern scientific ideas on cosmology are creating new ideas on how to interpret the Quran's cosmogonical terms.[40] In particular, some modern-day Muslim groups have advocated for interpreting the term al-sama, traditionally believed to be a reference to both the sky and the seven heavens,[41] as instead referring to the universe as a whole.

Mirza Tahir Ahmad, head of the Ahmadiyya community, asserted in his book Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge & Truth that the Big Bang theory was foretold in the Quran. He referenced the verse 30 of the Sūrat al-Anbiyāʼ, which says that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity. :[42][43]

Have those who disbelieved not considered that the heavens and the earth were a joined entity, and We separated them and made from water every living thing? Then will they not believe?

— Quran 21:30

This view that the Qu'ran references the initial singularity of the Big Bang is also accepted by many Muslim scholars outside of the Ahmadiyya community such as Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri, who is a Sufi scholar, and Muhammad Asad, who was a nondenominational Muslim scholar.[44][45] Further, some scholars such as Faheem Ashraf of the Islamic Research Foundation International, Inc. and Sheikh Omar Suleiman of the Yaqeen Institute for Islamic Research argue that the scientific theory of an expanding universe is described in Sūrat adh-Dhāriyāt:[44][46]

And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are [its] expander.

— Quran 51:47

References

  1. ^ Wright, E.L (24 May 2009). "Cosmology and". Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial. Retrieved 2009-10-15.
  2. ^ Kragh, Helge (1996). Cosmology and Controversy. Princeton University Press. p. ?. ISBN 978-0-691-00546-1.[page needed]
  3. ^ Ellis, George F. R. (2007). "Issues in the Philosophy of Cosmology". Philosophy of Physics. pp. 1183–1285. arXiv:astro-ph/0602280. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.338.6650. doi:10.1016/B978-044451560-5/50014-2. ISBN 978-0444515605. S2CID 118897904.
  4. ^ Alexander, Vilenkin (1982-11-04). "Creation of universes from nothing". Physics Letters B. 117 (1–2): 25–28. Bibcode:1982PhLB..117...25V. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(82)90866-8. ISSN 0370-2693.
  5. ^ Manson, N.A. (1993). God and Design: The Teleological Argument and Modern Science. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-26344-3. The Big Bang theory strikes many people as having theological implications, as shown by those who do not welcome those implications.
  6. ^ Harris, J.F. (2002). Analytic Philosophy of Religion. Springer Press. ISBN 978-1-4020-0530-5. Both theists and physicists have seen the big bang theory as leaving open such an opportunity for a theistic explanation.
  7. ^ Eric J. Lerner (2010). The Big Bang Never Happened: A Startling Refutation of the Dominant Theory of the Origin of the Universe. Vintage Books. ISBN 978-0307773548. Retrieved 2012-03-16. From theologians to physicists to novelists, it is widely believed that the Big Bang theory supports Christian concepts of a creator. In February 1989, for example, the front-page article of the New York Times Book Review argued that scientists argued that scientists and novelists were returning to God, in large part through the influence of the Big Bang.
  8. ^ James Franklin Harris (2002). Analytic Philosophy of Religion. Springer Science. ISBN 978-1402005305. THE KALAM COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT Perhaps the best known and most clearly formulated version of the cosmological argument that incorporates the fundamental concepts of big bang theory is found in the work of William Lane Craig.
  9. ^ McGrath, A.E. (2011). Science and Religion. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-4443-5808-7. It will be clear that this type of argument relates directly to modern cosmological research, particularly the "big bang" theory of the origins of the cosmos. This is also true of the kalam version of the cosmological argument, to which we now turn.
  10. ^ Kragh, H. (1996). Cosmology and Controversy. Princeton (NJ): Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-02623-7.
  11. ^ Harrison, P. (2010). The Cambridge Companion to Science and Religion. Cambridge University Press. p. 9. ISBN 978-0-521-71251-4. One reason for initial resistance to the Big Bang theory was that, unlike the rival Steady-State hypothesis, it proposed that the universe has a beginning – a proposition that for some had unwelcome religious implications.
  12. ^ Kragh, H. (2008). Entropic Creation. Ashgate Publishing. p. 226. ISBN 978-0-7546-6414-7. Andrei Zhdanov, Stalin's notorious chief ideologue, said in a speech in 1947 that Lemaître and his kindred spirits were 'Falsifiers of science [who] wanted to revive the fairy tale of the origin of the world from nothing ... Another failure of the 'theory' in question consists in the fact that it brings us to the idealistic attitude of assuming the world to be finite.'
  13. ^ Sushil Mittal; G. R. Thursby (2004). The Hindu World. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-0203644706. In the Vedic cosmogonies, the question of what caused the primordial desire does not arise; like the Big Bang of modern cosmology, the primal impulse is beyond all time and causation, so it makes no sense to ask what preceded it or what caused it. However, in the Hindu cosmology which we find in the Puranas and other non-Vedic Sanskrit texts, time has no absolute beginning; it is infinite and cyclic and so is kama.
  14. ^ John R. Hinnells (2010). The Routledge companion to the study of religion. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0415473286. There are also other cosmological models of the universe besides the Big bang model, including eternal universe theories – views more in keeping with Hindu cosmologies than with traditional theistic concepts of the cosmos.
  15. ^ Sunil Sehgal (1999). Encyclopædia of Hinduism: T–Z, Volume 5. Sarup & Sons. ISBN 978-8176250641. The theory is known as the 'Big Bang theory' and it reminds us of the Hindu idea that everything came from the Brahman which is "subtler than the atom, greater than the greatest" (Kathopanishad-2-20).
  16. ^ Moring, G. (1999). The Complete Idiot's Guide to Understanding Einstein. DK Publishing. p. 341. ISBN 978-0786542659. Retrieved 2015-08-20.
  17. ^ "Hinduism: Where Science and Spirituality Intersect | Gadadhara Pandit Dasa". huffingtonpost.com. 2011-09-20. Retrieved 2015-08-20.
  18. ^ "Are Eastern Religions More Science-Friendly? | Philip Goldberg". huffingtonpost.com. 2010-07-05. Retrieved 2015-08-20.
  19. ^ Kramer, Kenneth (1986). World scriptures: an introduction to comparative religions. Paulist Press. p. 34. ISBN 978-0-8091-2781-8.
  20. ^ Swami Ranganathananda (1991). Human Being in Depth: A Scientific Approach to Religion. SUNY Press. p. 21. ISBN 978-0-7914-0679-3.
  21. ^ "Quote by Carl Sagan: "The Hindu religion is the only one of the world..."". goodreads.com. Retrieved 2015-08-20.
  22. ^ Hammer, O. (2003). Claiming Knowledge: Strategies of Epistemology from Theosophy to the New Age. Brill. p. 283. ISBN 978-9004136380. Retrieved 2015-08-20.
  23. ^ Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 1994. p. 60. Retrieved 2015-08-20.
  24. ^ Diem-Lane, A. (2016-01-11). Spooky Physics. MSAC Philosophy Group. p. 42. Retrieved 2015-08-20.
  25. ^ Thorpe, C. (2008). Oppenheimer: The Tragic Intellect. University of Chicago Press. p. 54. ISBN 978-0226798486. Retrieved 2015-08-20.
  26. ^ Narayanan, Anand (2013-01-24). "'All I know is how to do physics' – The Hindu". Chennai, India: thehindu.com. Retrieved 2015-08-20.
  27. ^ "Fritjof Capra - Shiva's Cosmic Dance at CERN". Archived from the original on 2013-12-16. Retrieved 2012-09-30.
  28. ^ McDowell, Adam (December 5, 2010). "What does the Penrose Big Bang theory mean for religions?". National Post.
  29. ^ "Georges Lemaître, Father of the Big Bang". American Museum of Natural History. Archived from the original on 17 January 2013.
  30. ^ Ferris, T. (1988). Coming of age in the Milky Way. Morrow. pp. 274, 438. ISBN 978-0-688-05889-0., citing Berger, A. (1984). The Big bang and Georges Lemaître: proceedings of a symposium in honour of G. Lemaître fifty years after his initiation of big-bang cosmology, Louvainla-Neuve, Belgium, 10–13 October 1983. D. Reidel. p. 387. ISBN 978-90-277-1848-8.
  31. ^ Pope Pius XII (1951-11-02). "Ai soci della Pontificia Accademia delle Scienze, 22 novembre 1951 – Pio XII, Discorsi" (in Italian). Tipografia Poliglotta Vaticana. Retrieved 2012-02-23.
  32. ^ Russell, R.J. (2008). Cosmology: From Alpha to Omega. Fortress Press. ISBN 978-0-8006-6273-8. Conservative Protestant circles have also welcomed Big Bang cosmology as supporting a historical interpretation of the doctrine of creation.
  33. ^ Esslemont, J.E. (1980). Bahá'u'lláh and the New Era (5th ed.). Wilmette, Illinois: Baháʼí Publishing Trust. ISBN 978-0-87743-160-2.
  34. ^ a b c d Rafati, Vahid. Lawh-i-Hikmat: The Two Agents and the Two Patients. `Andalib, vol. 5, no. 19, pp. 29-38.
  35. ^ Taherzadeh, A. (1987). The Revelation of Bahá'u'lláh, Volume 4: Mazra'ih & Bahji 1877-92. Oxford, UK: George Ronald. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-85398-270-8.
  36. ^ Lepain, Jean-Marc (2015) [2002]. The Archeology of the Kingdom of God.
  37. ^ Mihrshahi, Robin (2002). "Ether, Quantum Physics and the Baháʼí Writings". Australian Baháʼí Studies Journal. 4: 3–20.
  38. ^ Lehman, Dale E. (2005). Cosmology and the Baháʼí Writings Archived 2014-11-28 at the Wayback Machine.
  39. ^ Julio, Savi (1989). The Eternal Quest for God: An Introduction to the Divine Philosophy of 'Abdu'l-Bahá (PDF). Oxford, UK: George Ronald. p. 134. ISBN 978-0-85398-295-1.
  40. ^ Hasan, Haslin; Mat Tuah, Ab. Hafiz (2014). "Quranic Cosmogony: Impact of Contemporary Cosmology on the Interpretation of Quranic Passages Relating to the Origin of the Universe" (PDF). Kyoto Bulletin of Islamic Area Studies: 122–140. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 29, 2016. Retrieved October 28, 2016. Our study shows that modern scientific findings do indeed influence modern Muslims' understanding of the Quran's cosmogonical terms, concepts and narratives by modifying the older Tafsir sources, even deviating from them altogether and offering fresh ideas.
  41. ^ Oliver Leaman, ed. (2005). The Qur'an: An Encyclopedia. Routledge. p. 258.
  42. ^ Ahmad, Mirza Tahir. "The Quran and Cosmology". Al Islam. Retrieved 7 April 2017.
  43. ^ "Big Bang Theory and Religion by Ron Kurtus – Succeed in Understanding Religion: School for Champions". www.school-for-champions.com. Retrieved 2017-01-06.
  44. ^ a b Ashraf, Faheem. "Islamic Concept of Creation of Universe Big Bang and Science-Religion Interaction". Retrieved 3 March 2017.
  45. ^ Asad, Muhammad (1984). The Message of the Qu'rán (PDF). Gibraltar, Spain: Dar al-Andalus Limited. p. 676. ISBN 978-1904510000.
  46. ^ Guessoum, Nidhal (2010). Islam's Quantum Question: Reconciling Muslim Tradition and Modern Science (PDF). I.B.Tauris. p. 351. ISBN 978-0857730756. Retrieved 3 March 2017.

Further reading

  • Leeming, David Adams, and Margaret Adams Leeming, A Dictionary of Creation Myths. Oxford University Press (1995), ISBN 0-19-510275-4.
  • Pius XII (1952), "Modern Science and the Existence of God," The Catholic Mind 49:182–192.
  • Ahmad, Mirza Tahir, Revelation, Rationality, Knowledge & Truth Islam International Publications Ltd (1987), ISBN 1-85372-640-0. The Quran and Cosmology
  • Wickman, Leslie, "God of the Big Bang: How Modern Science Affirms the Creator," Worthy Publishing (2015), ISBN 978-1617954252.

External links

This page was last edited on 29 April 2024, at 19:28
Basis of this page is in Wikipedia. Text is available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 Unported License. Non-text media are available under their specified licenses. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. WIKI 2 is an independent company and has no affiliation with Wikimedia Foundation.
Contact WIKI 2
Introduction
Terms of Service
Privacy Policy